We the people have the right to freedom of speech…however painful, disturbing or vile. I’ve been the target of some pretty heinous free speech…I’ve had people walk up to me at LGBT Pride festivals and say much of the same shit those Westboro folks say at military funerals.

And, even though I resent the hell out of that shit…even though I fret over the damage those hate-filled words may do to people who aren’t conditioned to handle it and don’t have a support network to help them purge post-alteraction…even so, I would fight like hell to protect the right of the rancid to speak their troubled shit in the public square.

Supporting speech we agree with is easy…it’s the speech we disagree with that challenges our commitment to the First Amendment.

And no, we don’t have the right to shout fire in a crowded movie theatre just to spark a stampede.

I get that.

But, as the Supreme Court prepares to hear the Westboro Baptist Church case, I’m pondering the implications of a ruling that may limit free speech and I’m concerned.

What door could that kind of ruling open…how many different ways could it be interpreted?

If the court limits free speech directed at individuals…what would that mean? How would it all play out?

This shit ain’t easy.

The ruling has the potential to provide relief for many military families as they lay their loved ones to rest…

I was watching the news this morning and said this to my manfriend: "God I would hate to be a Supreme Court judge today."

I can't even imagine having to handle this case. The fact that the poor father was ordered by the previous judge to pay them $16k makes me ill, but at the same time...our rights, our freedom is in the balance. I'd like to see one of those f*^&ers protest around me though. They will get theirs.

@Guerni canI doubt Voltaire ate much cheese for three reasons:- food habits, *if any*, change in 2.5 centuries - an individual is not deterministically linked with national food habits, if any (even, now, some French hate cheese). - Voltaire spent a great part of his life abroad, not to be jailed, in Preussen , when he was young, and in Schweiz (he had some land at the border) when he was very old. In Schweiz , one can *now* find excellent chocolate, clocks and banks, but the customs were very serious at this time

Yup. The absolute best way to handle this is the love-drenched, Dada-esque counter protest. I have been collecting images from all over of people counter protesting these guys with signs like "God Hates Signs". Ridiculous, loving, and fun are the things that really get to these haters.

As one that lived in Topeka, KS where the Westboro Baptist church is located, I hope the Supreme Court does something to Phelps and his crew to make them pay.

I think there isn't enough reign on what the media and other people are allowed to say under their First Amendment rights.

I've been at many events that have had Phelps & his family picketing. Not just soldiers funerals, but plays and synagogues and just picketing on the street corners. Its made Topeka, KS an UGLY place for decades.

Yet, what about the right to free speech impedes the right to privacy? Is one superior to the other?

The way I see it, you're right, we must protect free speech at all costs. But a father has the right to a private burial for his son. Now his memories of that last moment will be forever tainted.

Admittedly, it is a very dicey issue. But I see no reason why in such cases reasonable restrictions can be found. For example, you could protest outside the gates of a cemetary, but not right next to a grave. Then both rights would be preserved, wouldn't they?

And this is where what the conservative press would call "liberal elite" thinking meets the sharp end of the reality.

I can't imagine how unpleasant it must (have) be(en). It's a little like arguing against the death penalty: surely anyone with an iota of compassion in their soul knows it's a sickening thing... until, that is, it's your sister / mother / whatever that's brutalised and murdered.

I know this is a flippant thing to say, but I wonder if the town's ever considered moving en masse to the next state? Part of me rather anjoys the idea of these people shouting their hate into an empty street.

I'm glad you said it. I agree too, as hateful and distasteful as it is.

Ferrette mentioned reasonable restrictions. On NPR, the lawyer for WBC (Phelp's daughter, if I remember correctly, for what it's worth) says that they were outside the 1000-feet restriction zone, that the father never even saw the signs the day of the funeral, and only filed the suit after he saw pictures/video of the protest on the news and/or online. Granted, it could be that none of that's true. But, what if it is? Does that convince anyone? Plus, someone on NPR made the contention that "funerals are different". Are they?

I'm sure that all of these questions are why the Supreme Court took the case. It's interesting for sure.

It is so hard to understand these people. Really, what is the point of protesting someone's funeral? It makes them look like fools! They should not be taken seriously, they should be ignored. A parent has the right to bury their child in peace. No matter what. These crazy people always make their connections to wholly unrelated things then vehemently go out of their homes to "defend" their insanity. It is a bizarre thing that really should be studied psychologically. How can they justify this in their minds? They think they are sane because there are other people who believe the same things. Just because you are backed by a group, that does not make you right. They are wrong on many levels. God does not hate America because of homosexuals. If God hates America it is because of all the dirt the government has done and kicked up around the world. But my guess is that God is not punishing America, and these nut jobs need to leave people alone and look within themselves for the hate they are spreading.

@Guernican no 2:your comment number one did not make me suffer at all, but led me to wonder :whether *the french alimentary habits (if any : I eat frogs only in Chinese restaurants, as they are better, hate snails and prefer Italian cheese) were the same in Voltaire's time and now (unlikely not : poor people ate a huge amount of bread, rich people ate a lot of meat, drunk a lot of wine -like English ones-).*More generally, if one could demonstrate orally : as a writer, he wes more interested in written protests (oral protest were likely to be riots or revolutions : now, they come without physical violence)* and wether a constitution , among the oldest in the world, can decide about the right to protest orally and publicly (the french one is only 50 yrs old, and its seems to be already too old, as most of the new laws find out being unconstitutionnal...)

Westboro are scam artists. They specialize in entrapment. That's why many of them carry cameras around their necks: to get someone so riled up they take a swing, then it's all caught on camera. Phelps is (or was) an obstructionist lawyer, supposedly a really good one. they may have an anti-gay agenda, but like somany contrarian Republican douchebags, the money is the medium.